Home page logo
/

bugtraq logo Bugtraq mailing list archives

Re: Buffer overflow prevention
From: Crispin Cowan <crispin () immunix com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 11:12:39 -0700

Eygene A. Ryabinkin wrote:

I have an idea on buffer overflow prevention. I doubt that it's new, but I
haven't seen an implementation of it in any freely distributable Un*x system.
So, I hardly need your comments on it.
...
The idea itself: all (correct me if I'm wrong) buffer overflows are based on
the fact that we're using the stack, referenced by SS:ESP pair, both for
procedure return address and for local variables. It seems to me, that would we
have two stacks -- one for real stack and one for variables -- it will solve
a bunch of problems. So, my suggestion: let us organise two segments: one for
normal stack, growing downwards, referenced by SS:ESP pair and the second one,
for local variables, referenced by GS:EBP pair, with either upwards or
downwards growing. Now, if we use first segment for passing variables and
procedure return addresses (normal stack usage), and second segment only for
local procedure variables, we will have the following advantages:

This is approximately what StackShield <http://www.angelfire.com/sk/stackshield/info.html> does. However, it does not appear to have been maintained since 2000.

Crispin

--
Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.           http://immunix.com/~crispin/
Chief Scientist, Immunix       http://immunix.com
           http://www.immunix.com/shop/



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]